Exactly what it says on the tin.

You suck at Craigslist, Vol. III

In the last three days, someone has posted the same hideous “lion and giraffe” pictures three times, with increasing hilarity.

Listing #1:

lion and giraffe – $30

Date: 2008-08-16, 8:30AM EDT

these are really expensive pics, u can go look at them in the finger hut magazine from last year, they cost about 300.00 new. i want 30 for the set.there 3 foot long and 3 feet wide, very nice. email me if intereted

Point 1: Um, that’s not a lion.
Point 2: It doesn’t matter how much you paid for them.
Point 3: The “finger hut magazine” is a sure indicator of high quality. It’s right up there with the Lillian Vernon catalog.
Point 4: 3 foot long and 3 foot wide, huh? So they’re square, is what you’re saying? Okay.

Listing #2:

giraffe and lion pic – $35

Date: 2008-08-17, 9:09AM EDT

these are very expensive . they were bought last year through avon there cost about 300.00 dollars new there about 3 feet long and 2 feet wide, sell the as a set,thats how they were bought, pleas email me if intterested

Point 1: Still not a lion.
Point 2: So you’re relisting them, and asking MORE than your original listing?
Point 3: Oh, they were bought through Avon?
Point 4: Now they’re 3 feet long and 2 feet wide.
Point 5: Sell as a set? Would anyone really want just one of those?

Listing #3:

giraffe and lion pic – $35

Date: 2008-08-18, 9:23AM EDT

these are very expensive brand new, they were bought last year but never used, they were bought from avon, i want 35 for the pair of them . there about 4 feet long and 3 feet wide . please email me if interested

Point 1: STILL not a lion.
Point 2: Never used? Um, they’re wall hangings, right? They’re hanging on a wall in the photo, right?
Point 3: Now they’re 4 feet long and 3 feet wide.

Has no one yet pointed out that the giraffe and the not-a-lion are native to different continents? I wonder when Fingerhut/Avon is going to offer cheesy matching wall hangings of a giraffe and a koala.

I also like how the price increases with the last post. The pictures started out at $30, but then the person listing changed the price to $35 when they didn’t sell…? Is this some kind of weird Craigslist psychology here, you know: increase the price in order to increase the perceived value? Nah, I can’t give them that much credit.

Guys guys guys, this is very simple. It all goes along with furniture physics. There’s a theory that the Universe is constantly expanding! This obviously helps prove that fact, since there is definite exponential growth in these “lyin’ (lion)” pictures.

Finger Hut?!?! Do they even SELL stuff for $300? When I was in college many years ago, I ordered a set of knives from them for $19.95. Fine cutlery, they were not. And who they hell buys paintings from Avon? Perfume, nail polish etc. okay, but….

Hah! I remember Fingerfuck, and my mom’s trials and tribulations with them! No, these pictures don’t actually retail for $300, but the lister must be accounting for the interests and fees the average customer would accumulate while in the process of paying for them, which will wind you up near $300.

Anyone else have the Teddy Bear with a Blue Ribbon pattern for dishes or linens when they were a kid? Heartwarming, no?

I went to Fingerhut.com, searched for “Wall Art” and then sorted on price, high to low. Similarly tacky paintings sell for $500. For just $34.99/month you can get a canvas print of “Wild Wing ‘Winter Retreat’ Deer Canvas Wall Art”.

So I’m picturing someone buying crappy $500 prints ON LAYAWAY. There is not a happy story behind that transaction…

I guess we have another example of a commonality between the upper and lower classes — wasting money on artwork of highly dubious value.